Category: Ethics in Government

By Posted on Posted in Business Ethics, Ethics in Government, Ethics: General, Marketing Techniques and Philosophies, Shel's Personal Life, Social and Economic Justice Tagged with , , , , ,

Although I’m a strong advocate of same-sex marriage, and have attended a number of gay and lesbian ceremonies long before they were legal in any U.S. state, I am very disturbed by a ruling of New Mexico’s Human Rights Commission that a photography studio, Elane Photography (owned by Elaine Huguenin and Jonathan Huguenin, was not within its rights to decline a job photographing a same-sex wedding. (That link is to the NPR story–scroll down–and in the midst of the coverage is a link to download a PDF of the actual decision.) And the photography studio is to pick up $6,637.94 in plaintiff’s legal fees!

The decision quotes the actual e-mail correspondence, which was civil, measured,not the least bit threatening, and simply stating that the couple did not choose to photograph same-sex weddings.

When someone contacts me regarding my copywriting/consulting services, I send back an e-mail response that includes the following:

Please note that I reserve the right to reject a project if I feel I’m not the right person for it. This would include projects that in my opinion promote racism, homophobia, bigotry or violence–or that promote the tobacco, nuclear power, or weapons industries–or if I do not feel the product is of high enough quality that I can get enthusiastic about it.

In other words, I am putting out my values and stating clearly that I will not accept projects in conflict with my values. I have in fact occasionally turned down projects because they were promoting causes I actively disagree with. And in my award-winning sixth book, Principled Profit: Marketing That Puts People First, I even have a section called “When to Say No to a Sale.”

While the values of these photographers are not my values, I think they, too, should have the right to turn down projects that violate their particular beliefs. I feel this on both ethical and practical grounds: the truth is, when someone takes on a project in conflict with deep internal values, that person won’t turn in good work.

I support their right to not be hired to perform their art for a cause they disagree with; this is not a public accommodation, such as a restaurant or hotel denying service. It is not a job discrimination issue, but a self-employed couple in the creative arts choosing not to be hired by a prospective client.

It would be a sad day indeed if someone were to compel me to write propaganda for, say, a homophobic organization, or a company whose primary product is nuclear weapons.

I don’t know if there’s any appeal process for the New Mexico board, but I certainly hope there is. Something is very definitely rotten in this decision.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Ethics in Government Tagged with , ,

California State and Consumer Services Agency chief Rosario Marin resigned from the Schwarzenegger cabinet after taking criticism for accepting large speaking fees from companies who had a vested interest in the outcome of her decisions.

California policy prohibits this, and Marin’s actions show exactly why. I say this as someone who makes part of my own living as a professional speaker, but goodness, I’m not a regulator regulating my own clients!

A quick bit from the L.A. Times story:

Among the fees Marin took was $15,000 from Pfizer Inc. for a speech in 2007 at a time when the company was lobbying the Board of Pharmacy, a regulatory panel Marin oversaw. Bristol-Myers Squibb paid $13,500 for Marin’s speaking services last year within weeks of lobbying her agency.

“I don’t know how you could justify that,” said Assemblyman Hector De La Torre (D-South Gate), chairman of a legislative committee on accountability and oversight. “The conflict is so clear, in my mind.”

I don’t know either.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Business Ethics, Ethics in Government, Peace and War Tagged with

We’ve known for quite a while that the reconstruction effort in Iraq is rife with incredible corruption. Under the Bush administration, there were basically no safeguards, and stories of money diverted into the pockets of US looters were legion.

Still, I had no idea it was this bad. According to Patrick Cockburn of the respected UK newspaper The Independent, when you add up all the thefts of a few billion here, a few million there, it totals around $125 billion. That is two-and-a-quarter times as much as Madoff’s $50 billion Ponzi scheme.

Perhaps the saddest part is that of course, this money is NOT being used to rebuild Iraq. And therefore, not creating some good will to mitigate the horrific effects of our totally unjustified invasion and occupation. A proper rebuilding effort would have gone a long way toward demonstrating that the US had at least some altruistic motives. Instead, the rubble grows, the infrastructure fails, and Americans are hated more than ever.

I hope the Obama administration cracks down on these crooks, gets the troops out (I notice the timeline just got longer, from 16 to 18 months), and shows the Iraqi people that we are made of stronger stuff, and take seriously the mission to help undo the calamity we created.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Ethics in Government

President Obama came into office following a long and thorough process of checking people out, and with a particular (and very welcome) screen for ethics issues. Yet here it is, just two weeks into this new presidency, and there have been at least five nominees who’ve either raised ethics eyebrows or withdrawn entirely: Bill Richardson, Tom Daschle, Nancy Killefer, Timothy Geithner, and William J. Lynn III among them. And there are several others whose close ties to the industries they’re supposed to regulate could make people more than a little nervous.

What is refreshing, at least, is Obama’s willingness to stand up and say that he “screwed up.” After eight years of a president who refused to take responsibility for his actions, who could not come up with a single action when asked point-blank what his mistakes were–even while he was digging the country into several concurrent very deep holes–that is a good thing indeed.

This is not the rampant and blatant corruption and favoritism of the Bush presidency, or even the somewhat shady dealings under Clinton. But still, it does raise questions–lots of questions. And the biggest question in my mind is whether the flaws are inherent in the system. Do we need such wide restructuring that the revolving door is bolted shut? And if we do, how do we find people with the competencies needed to run these huge agencies?

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Ethics in Government Tagged with ,

Not since Clarence Thomas called Anita Hill’s harassment allegations “a legal lynching” have I heard such disgusting self-aggrandizement as came out of the mouth of Gov. Rod Blagojevich. He actually has the chutzpah to compare himself to Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King Jr. and Gandhi.

These three heroes of mine have only one thing in common with Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King Jr. and Mahatma Gandhi: They all understood how to get attention in the media; they were marketers. Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King Jr. and Mahatma Gandhi is taking his roadshow to major media when he ought to be in Springfield, Illinois, at his impeachment trial.

Those three giants of social justice went to jail for the rightness of their cause. If Blagojevich goes to jail, it will be because he got greedy, and got caught. I cannot imagine King, Gandhi, or Mandela selling a senate seat to the highest bidder.

Oh, and if you want a relatively recent recap of the Thomas confirmation circus, look no further than this splendid diatribe by Frank Rich in the New York Times, October 7, 2007. It would be a violation of copyright for me to quote the whole thing, but I’ll give you a little taste–and the link:

Pity Clarence Thomas. Done in by what he calls “left-wing zealots draped in flowing sanctimony” — as he describes anyone who challenged his elevation to the court — he still claims to have suffered as much as African-Americans once victimized by “bigots in white robes.” Since kicking off his book tour on “60 Minutes” last Sunday, he has been whining all the way to the bank

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Ethics in Government, Transparency vs. Secrecy Tagged with ,

For years, I’ve been calling for openness and transparency (in business and in government–in this blog, in my award-winning sixth book, Principled Profit, in the Business Ethics Pledge, and elsewhere. Yet most businesses AND most government entities shroud themselves in secrecy, bury attempts at discourse, and give the impression of pulling the wool over the public eye.

This makes the Obama team’s high degree of transparency and active solicitation of public input (at the change.org website, through the in-person strategy sessions it organized, etc.) even more remarkable.

Consider this widely reported quote yesterday from an Associated Press story on Obama’s proposed tax cut by Steven R. Hurst:

At his meeting with bipartisan leaders of Congress, Obama said he would make his stimulus proposal available on the Internet, with a Google-like search function to show each proposed project or program, by congressional district, according to three people who attended.

Wow!

I find this especially interesting coming not from some kind of radical but from a mainline, centrist politician, many of whose policy platforms (especially in foreign affairs) are far more conservative than mine.

Change is about both form and substance. Obama is doing really well on the form so far; let’s hope he follows through into the substance.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Business Ethics, Ethics in Government, People Helping People, Politics

Calling it the worst fraud in history (far worse than Enron), Democracy Now released the shocking news that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) had known there were serious problems around Bernard Madoff for nine years!

Are you as sick and tired of this as I am? Enron fell apart in 2001. Michael Milken was indicted in 1989–that’s almost 20 years ago! And now we find out that Madoff, former head of NASDAQ, took the whole financial system for an astonishing $50 billion, suckering investors in with the promise of outrageously good yields and wiping out numerous good charities–the same week we find out Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich actually had the chutzpah to try to sell Obama’s vacant Senate seat.

Have we learned NOTHING since the Milken days?

If you’re all riled up about business scandals, about banks and industrialists coming to Washington to coax billions of our tax dollars out of the government while doing nothing either to change the over-lavish lifestyles or to pump credit back into the system, if you think these companies should get a clue before they come looking for a handout and the government should get a clue before it hands out our money without any oversight, if you’re sick and tired of being sick and tired–there are a few things you can do. They’re easy, they take almost no time, and they could make a difference.

First, tell Obama’s transition team what you want to see the next administration accomplish. It’s the first time I can remember a newly elected president making a conscious and thorough effort to tap the wisdom of the general public.

Second, sign the Business Ethics Pledge and help create a climate where the Milkens, Madoffs, Kenneth Lays, and Blagojeviches of the future won’t find anyone to listen to their crooked Ponzi schemes and extortionate rackets.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Business Ethics, Ethics in Government

Four years after launching the Business Ethics Pledge campaign, and five years after publishing my book, Principled Profit: Marketing That Puts People First, that shows that ethical businesses can more easily succeed, the goal of making future Enron scandals unthinkable seems very distant this week. One dismal news story after another!

A little sampling of the depressing headlines:

Democratic Governor Rod R. Blagojevich of Illinois, arrested on corruption charges, manages to paint himself as more venal and small-minded, and more focused on personal gain, than even Richard Nixon. Read more »

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Ethics in Government, People Helping People, Politics

Nelson Mandela was the first black president of South Africa, who came to power after decades of an oppressive apartheid regime that enforced a horrible climate on its people of color–the vast majority of its population. Mandela himself was imprisoned for 27 years.

When Mandela and the African National Congress came to power, it would have been easy to conduct Nuremberg-style trials and punish the transgressors. But instead, South Africa established an official Truth and Reconciliation Commission; he handled the need to change with love. The Commission thoroughly investigated many of the old regime’s criminals, but did not punish them–instead using the trials to create healing rather than division.

While it’s easy to imagine taking a good deal of satisfaction from seeing the rogues of our rogue state–Bush, Rumsfeld, Gonzales…and especially Rove and Cheney–on trial and facing long prison terms, from the point of view of healing the country and actually accomplishing a progressive agenda in these already-difficult times, it may make sense to have the trials but have them under the banner of truth and reconciliation, and let their consciences (such as they are) or the Higher Power they call claim to believe in, be the ones to punish them.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

By Posted on Posted in Ethics in Government, Ethics-International Tagged with , ,

From liberal Democrat State Senator Dianne Wilkerson of Massachusetts to Chen Shui-bian, the former President of Taiwan, there’s been another spate of politicians caught with their hands in the cookie jar.

Some of these people, like Alaska Senator Ted Stevens, have had positions of public trust for decades.

Isn’t it time we looked at this as a society? Not just in the U.S., but around the world. There’s got to be a way to govern that doesn’t put so much temptation in front of our politicians to abuse their trust and their power.

Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail